Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Today's Posts Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 08-19-2015, 01:37 PM   #61
Nebe
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Nebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Libtardia
Posts: 21,591
Wasn't she a republican when she was younger ? Before she got into politics?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Nebe is offline  
Old 08-19-2015, 05:30 PM   #62
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR View Post
Actually, classification is pretty concrete. As are the rules that prohibit most of it being on even the less secure Federally protected networks, let alone a private server in a residence. If even part of what is being reported is true, this is a significant breech of security.
How classified information should be handled is pretty concrete, but how it becomes classified in the first place is quite subjective. With this specific case, when it became classified is being completely misreported given the current information.

While I'm sure we should (and now do) have laws to prevent this kind of behavior, I still haven't seen any real evidence that undermines her argument of convenience or that laws were broken.

We'll see if the FBI determines this a little or big issue...
spence is offline  
Old 08-19-2015, 08:24 PM   #63
justplugit
Registered Grandpa
iTrader: (0)
 
justplugit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: east coast
Posts: 8,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post

We'll see if the FBI determines this a little or big issue...
The fact they are investigating makes it a big issue.
This is serious stuff that affects our national security.

My wife worked under top secret clearance. If anyone forgot to
lock a cabinet or desk overnight there would be a big red put sticker put on it.
You got fired immediately if you accumulated 3 stickers, and that was a low level position.

Hillary should be fired just for keeping women's pants suits in style.

" Choose Life "
justplugit is offline  
Old 08-19-2015, 10:23 PM   #64
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,134
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebe View Post
You know what's sad? The ignorance of the American people. The ignorance to let this bull#^&#^&#^&#^& distract them from what really matters.. Her political agenda. In all honesty I wonder if she actually wants this to happen so she doesn't have to talk about what she plans to do if elected.
Damn the 24 hour news cycle, which perpetuates endless drama in the name of "news".

Let's hear some promises so she can break them later
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
People can die when stuff is leaked like this. Our foreign policy suffers greatly when the other people can read the mail (literally) of the Secretary of State. Maybe Obama is really as smart as you seem to think he is but his efforts were undermined by the beyond negligent handling of secure information and perhaps worse, intent, because his Secretary of State could not keep sensitive effing data on secure networks. Instead she served it on a porcelain platter for the countries that seek (successfully in many ways) to undermine your hero of the people.

I am not a Guvmint Intelligence type though I read a little open source and have known a spook or three (seriously). I am , professionally, an IT person that supports smaller IT and if what HALF has been reported in fairly reliable news sources is legit. She effed up. Big Time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
How classified information should be handled is pretty concrete, but how it becomes classified in the first place is quite subjective. With this specific case, when it became classified is being completely misreported given the current information.

While I'm sure we should (and now do) have laws to prevent this kind of behavior, I still haven't seen any real evidence that undermines her argument of convenience or that laws were broken.
It is not subjective. It is concrete. It is clearly defined.

http://20committee.com/2015/08/12/th...llarys-emails/

Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
We'll see if the FBI determines this a little or big issue...
Yes, we will: http://www.npr.org/2015/08/19/432908...m_term=nprnews

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline  
Old 08-20-2015, 06:35 AM   #65
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by justplugit View Post
The fact they are investigating makes it a big issue.
Of course. The FBI doesn't pick people at trandom to investigate. If the FBI (who works for Obama, not the Koch Brothers) is investigating her server, it's because there is some evidence to suggest that laws were broken.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-24-2015, 07:36 AM   #66
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,134
Blog Entries: 1
Interesting piece puts things in perspective

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/hi...rticle/2570680

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline  
Old 08-24-2015, 08:37 AM   #67
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I believe the thumb drive was just used to create a backup of her server for her attorneys to have.
So it was just used for making copies of e-mails, she shouldn't have had on her personal server in the first place, so she could give them to other people to open up on their non-government secured networks.....Brilliant.

I guess that's no big deal then....maybe she should just put'em up on instagram then.

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 08-24-2015, 11:24 PM   #68
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
she's toast........and draft Biden is the response?...gotta hand it to the dems.....while the repubs are sorting things out with their field of many, they don't have anyone running that is as dishonest as Hillary, as dumb as Biden or as distant from America's founding principles as Bernie
scottw is offline  
Old 08-25-2015, 06:59 AM   #69
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
she's toast........and draft Biden is the response?...gotta hand it to the dems.....while the repubs are sorting things out with their field of many, they don't have anyone running that is as dishonest as Hillary, as dumb as Biden or as distant from America's founding principles as Bernie
Trump, while successful, is a clown. But I think there are soime great talents in that field, and Ben Carson impresses me more and more every time he open his mouth.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 08-29-2015, 04:37 PM   #70
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR View Post
It is not subjective. It is concrete. It is clearly defined.

http://20committee.com/2015/08/12/th...llarys-emails/
What should happen once information is classified is clearly defined but the process as to how it gets there is quite subjective.

The other little item lost on everyone also seems to be that the state.gov email address she "should" have been using isn't supposed to have "classified" information on it either.

Compare this to the gwb43.com debacle and Clinton doesn't even come close...
spence is offline  
Old 08-29-2015, 09:07 PM   #71
justplugit
Registered Grandpa
iTrader: (0)
 
justplugit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: east coast
Posts: 8,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post

Compare this to the gwb43.com debacle and Clinton doesn't even come close...
Only time will tell after the FBI investigation is complete.

Wasn't the server supposed to be in Chapaqua where Hillary felt "comfortable"
because secret service guarded the property there, but ended up in a bathroom in Jersey?

" Choose Life "
justplugit is offline  
Old 08-30-2015, 05:47 PM   #72
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,134
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
What should happen once information is classified is clearly defined but the process as to how it gets there is quite subjective.

The other little item lost on everyone also seems to be that the state.gov email address she "should" have been using isn't supposed to have "classified" information on it either.

Compare this to the gwb43.com debacle and Clinton doesn't even come close...

Seeing you like Business Insider (fluff pieces mostly) I link the article from there:

Quote:
The "extremely serious" investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while she served as secretary of state is being led by an FBI "A-team," an intelligence source told Fox News.

The source said the investigation is centered around 18 US Code 793, a section of the Espionage Act related to gathering and transmitting national-defense information.

Two emails reportedly found on Clinton's server from 2009 and 2011 contained information regarded as "Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information," one of the highest levels of classification.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-a...e-email-2015-8

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline  
Old 08-30-2015, 07:23 PM   #73
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
the process as to how it gets there is quite subjective.
No it's not.....

ALL government networks carry a classification level.....any data....ANY data generated on that network carries that classification until it is authorized to be downgraded to a lower level.

And even if she used her .gov email and transmitted or stored classified data on it, that would be a spill and would generate an automatic investigation.....

And just because documents don't carry a classification of Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret doesn't mean it doesn't fall under other categories that need special attention.

Categories like Unclass but Sensitive, FOUO (For Official Use Only), or NOFORN (No Foreign Nationals).....are all types of documents that may not carry a Classification but still need to be treated appropriately.....

At the very least she is guilty of gross negligence for by-passing government systems/safeguards......if they find out that she knowingly moved classified documents from government systems to Unclass systems, she should be doing time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Last edited by The Dad Fisherman; 08-31-2015 at 05:08 AM..

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 08-30-2015, 09:11 PM   #74
ecduzitgood
time to go
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,318
I wonder if Bill is secretly hoping that she does time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
ecduzitgood is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 07:59 AM   #75
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,134
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
No it's not.....

ALL government networks carry a classification level.....any data....ANY data generated on that network carries that classification until it is authorized to be downgraded to a lower level.

And even if she used her .gov email and transmitted or stored classified data on it, that would be a spill and would generate an automatic investigation.....

And just because documents don't carry a classification of Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret doesn't mean it doesn't fall under other categories that need special attention.

Categories like Unclass but Sensitive, FOUO (For Official Use Only), or NOFORN (No Foreign Nationals).....are all types of documents that may not carry a Classification but still need to be treated appropriately.....

At the very least she is guilty of gross negligence for by-passing government systems/safeguards......if they find out that she knowingly moved classified documents from government systems to Unclass systems, she should be doing time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


If ANYONE else, any mere mortal, had done this, they would already be locked up with an investigation well underway.

The fact that politicians can skirt the same rules that bind the rest of us is absurd and is another indication on how far we have fallen from the path the founding fathers intended.

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 08:35 AM   #76
Nebe
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Nebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Libtardia
Posts: 21,591
We the people for the people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Nebe is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 09:38 AM   #77
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,242
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...lumn/71421242/
PaulS is online now  
Old 08-31-2015, 10:25 AM   #78
justplugit
Registered Grandpa
iTrader: (0)
 
justplugit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: east coast
Posts: 8,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebe View Post
We the people for the people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Amazing how quickly they forget as soon as they get into office.
I'm sure the Founding Fathers felt it was an honor to serve the people.
I still feel each candidate should only be allowed to spend the same amount
of $ to run for office and shorter term limits applied.
It will never happen as they would have to initiate the change.

Think about it, most of these Congressmen are lawyers capable of making
mega bucks a year but choose to work for less than $200, 000 a year.

IMHO it certainly isn't because they want to SERVE the People.

" Choose Life "
justplugit is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 10:26 AM   #79
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
That article does absolutely nothing to change what I stated....

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 11:57 AM   #80
Nebe
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Nebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Libtardia
Posts: 21,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by justplugit View Post
Amazing how quickly they forget as soon as they get into office.
I'm sure the Founding Fathers felt it was an honor to serve the people.
I still feel each candidate should only be allowed to spend the same amount
of $ to run for office and shorter term limits applied.
It will never happen as they would have to initiate the change.

Think about it, most of these Congressmen are lawyers capable of making
mega bucks a year but choose to work for less than $200, 000 a year.

IMHO it certainly isn't because they want to SERVE the People.
It goes kinda like this.


http://youtu.be/CkTBf7HW_rg
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Nebe is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 12:43 PM   #81
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
No it's not.....

ALL government networks carry a classification level.....any data....ANY data generated on that network carries that classification until it is authorized to be downgraded to a lower level.

And even if she used her .gov email and transmitted or stored classified data on it, that would be a spill and would generate an automatic investigation.....
If all government networks carry a classification level, yet there was no hard rule against using private email, that would suggest the default classification at state.gov was pretty low, if existent at all.

So if there wasn't a hard rule on using private email, and the state.gov servers aren't supposed to have classified information on them anyway, I don't see where the argument is that she broke any laws. It's a totally different scenario than Petraeus.

Remember that Clinton isn't even the subject of the DOJ investigation and I believe none of the information was sent or received with a classified status.

Sure, it wasn't wise for a variety of reasons but I'm not sure they were doing it to hide anything. If that was the case you'd have a totally clandestine account.
spence is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 01:13 PM   #82
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,231
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...74b_story.html
spence is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 01:15 PM   #83
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,134
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
If all government networks carry a classification level, yet there was no hard rule against using private email, that would suggest the default classification at state.gov was pretty low, if existent at all.

So if there wasn't a hard rule on using private email, and the state.gov servers aren't supposed to have classified information on them anyway, I don't see where the argument is that she broke any laws. It's a totally different scenario than Petraeus.

Remember that Clinton isn't even the subject of the DOJ investigation and I believe none of the information was sent or received with a classified status.

Sure, it wasn't wise for a variety of reasons but I'm not sure they were doing it to hide anything. If that was the case you'd have a totally clandestine account.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...825-story.html

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 01:23 PM   #84
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,134
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post

"“It’s common” that people end up using unclassified systems to transmit classified information, said Jeffrey Smith, a former CIA general counsel who’s now a partner at Arnold & Porter, where he often represents defendants suspected of misusing classified information."

Interesting that this Jeffrey Smith frequently quoted in you article was several times an adviser to The Clintons

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015...email-scandal/

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 01:30 PM   #85
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR View Post
2 emails that should have been top secret out of over 6,000 doesn't a "systematic effort" make.

Additionally, isn't the outrage over these stats pretty moot without a baseline to compare them against? How common is this?
spence is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 02:43 PM   #86
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
If all government networks carry a classification level,
Its not "If".....they do.....anywhere from "Top Secret" to "Unclassified" , Every network as to be certified to a certain level.....this is what type of information that is certified to be present on that network

Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
yet there was no hard rule against using private email, that would suggest the default classification at state.gov was pretty low, if existent at all..
She can use private e-mail....there is no Rule against it....but there are plenty of rules a responsible government official must adhere to when transmitting government docs....and putting any classified/unclassified sensitive information on them is a no-no

Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
So if there wasn't a hard rule on using private email, and the state.gov servers aren't supposed to have classified information on them anyway,
Again, there are hard rules on what types of documents can be on an unclassed network...if state.gov mail server is on an unclassed network, then she can't have them on that server either

Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I don't see where the argument is that she broke any laws. It's a totally different scenario than Petraeus.
We'll find out when they are done with the investigation, won't we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Sure, it wasn't wise for a variety of reasons but I'm not sure they were doing it to hide anything. If that was the case you'd have a totally clandestine account.
Of course she wasn't doing it to hide anything...that's obvious....it was all hanging out there for every hacker in the world to look at...the problem is she should have taken the safeguards to HIDE EVERYTHING....that's the problem

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 03:14 PM   #87
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,134
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
2 emails that should have been top secret out of over 6,000 doesn't a "systematic effort" make.

Additionally, isn't the outrage over these stats pretty moot without a baseline to compare them against? How common is this?
Two emails out of 6K is not the sample pool being discussed. TWO emails out of FORTY in the sample reviewed by the Intelligence Community Inspector General had top secret / compartmentalized information.

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites...n%20server.pdf


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
Its not "If".....they do.....anywhere from "Top Secret" to "Unclassified" , Every network as to be certified to a certain level.....this is what type of information that is certified to be present on that network



She can use private e-mail....there is no Rule against it....but there are plenty of rules a responsible government official must adhere to when transmitting government docs....and putting any classified/unclassified sensitive information on them is a no-no



Again, there are hard rules on what types of documents can be on an unclassed network...if state.gov mail server is on an unclassed network, then she can't have them on that server either



We'll find out when they are done with the investigation, won't we?



Of course she wasn't doing it to hide anything...that's obvious....it was all hanging out there for every hacker in the world to look at...the problem is she should have taken the safeguards to HIDE EVERYTHING....that's the problem
Yes - she was at best, sacrificing security for convenience, at worst she was blatantly and willfully defying the rules and logic on handling government information to prevent future investigations against her. Meanwhile, she made it easier for other governments to read the email of the Secretary of State.

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 05:13 PM   #88
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR View Post
Two emails out of 6K is not the sample pool being discussed. TWO emails out of FORTY in the sample reviewed by the Intelligence Community Inspector General had top secret / compartmentalized information.
The State Department has already released over 6000 emails and another 6000 today I believe which a few hundred of are being referred to other agencies for further review.

The Inspector General decided to take no further action on the two they felt should be top secret and many have even argued the information in them is pretty benign.

Quote:
Yes - she was at best, sacrificing security for convenience, at worst she was blatantly and willfully defying the rules and logic on handling government information to prevent future investigations against her. Meanwhile, she made it easier for other governments to read the email of the Secretary of State.
Considering we know that state.gov has already been hacked I'm not sure it really means all that much. It's a wake up call to harden everything...
spence is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 05:49 PM   #89
justplugit
Registered Grandpa
iTrader: (0)
 
justplugit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: east coast
Posts: 8,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
The State Department has already released over 6000 emails and another 6000 today I believe which a few hundred of are being referred to other agencies for further review.pretty benign. [/UOTE]

Yes, I believe there were around 150 classified out of the ones released today.


Considering we know that state.gov has already been hacked I'm not sure it
really means all that much. It's a wake up call to harden everything...
Your right Spence, what better way to wake up to the Dangers then to make an example of a High Profile person like Hillary. Put her in the clink and throw away the key.

" Choose Life "
justplugit is offline  
Old 08-31-2015, 06:06 PM   #90
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by justplugit View Post
Your right Spence, what better way to wake up to the Dangers then to make an example of a High Profile person like Hillary. Put her in the clink and throw away the key.
There's no evidence yet she did anything illegal. Why would you throw her in the clink?

If there are bigger issues our government needs to address then that's a systems problem.
spence is offline  
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com